Deutch v. Martin

Deutch v. Martin

The jury's award of $165,000 was unreasonably large and resulted from the case being put to the jury on a mistaken basis (treating the plaintiff as totally incapacitated and improperly using a few years of business success to project future earnings); therefore the appellate court allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial limited to the issue of damages.

Citation
[1943] SCR 366
Parties
Appellant Defendant: W.G. Deutch; Appellant Defendant: Sarah Deutch; Respondent Plaintiff: John Alexander Martin
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 May 1943
Procedural Posture
Tort Personal Injury (motor Vehicle) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario; Appeal Limited to Amount of Damages
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; new trial ordered limited to the issue of damages.
Legal Topics
Excessive Damages, New Trial Limited to Damages, Jury Verdict Review, Future Earning Capacity, Costs
Source Language
English
Torts Personal Injury Damages Civil Procedure Appeal Excessive Damages New Trial Limited to Damages Jury Verdict Review +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

W.G. Deutch

Appellant Defendant

Sarah Deutch

Appellant Defendant

John Alexander Martin

Respondent Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Tort Personal Injury (motor Vehicle) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario; Appeal Limited to Amount of Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the jury award of $165,000 for personal injuries was excessive
  2. 2 Whether the appellate court may set aside a damages verdict absent an error of law
  3. 3 Whether the case was put to the jury on a mistaken basis regarding total incapacity

Ratio Decidendi

The jury's award of $165,000 was unreasonably large and resulted from the case being put to the jury on a mistaken basis (treating the plaintiff as totally incapacitated and improperly using a few years of business success to project future earnings); therefore the appellate court allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial limited to the issue of damages.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; new trial ordered limited to the issue of damages.

Orders

  • New trial limited to assessment of the amount of damages only
  • Respondent entitled to costs of the action up to and including the first trial